Dave Brailsford, the performance director of the British cycling team and
general manager of Team Sky, may be beatified or vilified depending on how
the next few days go in the Olympic Velodrome.

Though his Sky team’s triumph in the Tour de France secured his place in sporting history, it could be the instant medal return that decides how high his award is in the next honours list.

Though other sports will applaud the success of Brailsford’s charges, it is not the results they should note, it is the production. It has been my privilege to have known Brailsford for several years as our paths have crossed in a professional capacity and he is an impressive individual.

When we spoke this week Brailsford stressed to me that his intimate knowledge is of cycling but I believe it is the application of his methods which is the really impressive thing.

Perhaps the most significant aspect of Brailsford’s philosophy is to identify himself not as a dictator whose word is sacred, but as the conductor of an orchestra in a system where others are left to do their jobs.

“Traditional coaching is very much dictate and control and a lot of it is about the coach,” he told me. “If you ask people, ‘do you like to be told what to do and if it doesn’t go quite right, do you like to be shouted at?’ ”

The answer seems obvious but Brailsford goes on: “Why do we think in sport that is going to get the best out of people, because it’s obviously not.”

If this view of the managerial or coaching role is taken on it opens up an entirely new structure for clubs and sports which is sustainable and minimises upheaval and expense. In big business a new chief operating officer does not mean the replacement of the whole board of directors and half the heads of departments.

Whereas in football and other professional sports conventional wisdom dictates that the new man brings with him some or all of his support staff, with the expense and time of negotiating new contracts and compensation payments for terminated contracts.

For the whole club, not just the players an entirely different approach is required; and this happens time and again. How can clubs hope to get long-term stability?

Within a stable structure you can foster the sort of trust and relationships that are needed to address the key factors to maximising individual and team performance.

Though the factors are interrelated, underpinning Brailsford’s approach is one thing – honesty. Very simple when seen on the page, this tenet is notoriously difficult to imbue. But without it nothing works.

The first step for Brailsford is a rigorous examination of a player’s ability. “Honesty in where you are as a player: these are the good points, these are the bad points.” These must be addressed, Brailsford says, with “someone who can give you an objective black and white assessment”.

This means, whatever standard the player, identifying where he is weak and getting the individual to accept he needs to improve and to commit to doing so.

Once individuals commit to improve they also have to have ownership of the team plan and their part in it, says Brailsford. The concept of ownership is crucial because it promotes unity and prevents players shying away from being accountable.

Far from laying down the law Brailsford says: “We encourage people to have a voice. It’s not a favour letting them speak. There is a professional obligation where you’re obliged to tell us what you think.”

This does not allow players to sit idly by having had their say. After discussion of the team plan, Brailsford says: “Where there is majority opinion, they are obliged to accept that and commit to it; like Cabinet responsibility. What you can’t do is come out of the room and say, ‘I never agreed with that decision in the first place’.”

Inevitably there are times when a game plan provokes more insistent opposition. “They have to understand that there is an arbiter here. Someone has to say, ‘I’ve heard everything, but on balance this is what we are going to do and why — and this cannot just be because I think it’s a good idea’,” says Brailsford.

“Team members have to understand the role they are given, accept it but then they have to deliver it.”

Importantly, having been part of the whole process it is much more difficult for players to blame someone else and for Brailsford the honesty before the event has to be replicated after it. The debriefing starts with the plan and then its execution; blaming the officials or anyone else is not an honest approach to assessing performance.

Brailsford’s work with Dr Steve Peters has led to a ready acceptance that sports science and psychology are inextricably linked to team performance. His view is that in the last 15 years the English Institute for Sport and the Olympic sports have leapt ahead of many professional sports and clubs because of the number of bright and able graduates that they have employed in specific roles.

Analysis by statistics and technology is important but more important is the interpretation and creative use of such information. Brailsford likens it to an accountant, who produces figures and a management accountant who interprets them as best for making a business succeed.

So how does he get highly talented individuals to play subordinate roles? One answer is to reward them properly and in cycling what a person gets paid is very closely linked to their team’s success rate.

Honesty, accountability and reward for success – what could be easier?